In March 2011, the Great East Japan Earthquake struck Japan, unleashing a tsunami that left some 20,000 people dead or missing. Sendai, the capital city of Miyagi Prefecture and a regional economic hub, was heavily affected by the disaster. About 500,000 residents in the city lost access to water, and the city’s primary wastewater treatment plant was completely submerged by the tsunami. Also, the tsunami damaged 325 kilometers of coastal railway assets and flooded about 100 kilometers of national highway in the Tohoku region, leading to the immediate closure of inland transport access to the devastated towns in need of assistance.
Four years later, while the recovery effort from the earthquake and tsunami was still underway, a private consortium signed a 30-year concession to operate Sendai Airport, making it the first state-owned airport in Japan operated by the private sector. This success was welcomed by policymakers and public-private partnership (PPP) practitioners with surprise—how could it be possible for a private operator to make a long-term investment decision in such a disaster-prone region?
Between 2004 and 2017, some 30 African countries have adopted laws regarding Public-Private Partnerships (PPP). If we were to add to this list the countries that have implemented PPP policies, and those who are in the midst of drafting PPP laws, the tally would rise, leaving us with less than just 10 African countries that are entirely without a PPP framework.
What this tells us is that the calls by international financial institutions have been heard by decision-makers in Africa:
But how does reality measure up to the theory? How many projects, based on PPP law, have actually reached financial close? Given the time required to prepare a PPP, it is maybe too early to see PPP laws translated into concrete PPP projects, especially as more than 20 countries have in fact adopted their laws only in the last five years.
The APMG PPP Certification Program enables participants to take their skills to the next level, and the Certified PPP Professional (CP3P) credential is a means to officially convey that expertise and ability.
At the core of the program is the PPP Guide, a comprehensive Body of Knowledge that distills globally agreed-upon definitions, concepts, and best practices on PPPs. The program is an innovation of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), the Islamic Development Bank (IsDB), the Multilateral Investment Fund (MIF), and the World Bank Group (WBG), with financial support from the Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPIAF).
Whether you’re thinking about signing up, or already enrolled, in this series we share some insight from practitioners who have already passed the test. This week, we caught up with Abdul Nafi Sarwari, a Senior Financial & Economic Specialist for PPPs with the Central Partnership Authority within Afghanistan’s Ministry of Finance. Read his answers below.
Photo: Raymond Ward | Flickr Creative Commons
Sector reform is a familiar concept for anyone working in the energy sector, particularly in developing countries. Typically, reforms involve measures such as building an institutional framework that allows for an independent regulator, improving the operational efficiency of utilities (for example, by unbundling vertically-integrated utilities), creating an environment for private sector participation, and last but not least, introducing tariffs that reflect costs. All these measures are designed with one goal in mind: to put the sector on a sustainable path and improve the quality of service for end-users.
While acknowledging the many benefits that sector reforms can bring, one issue we continue to face is the poor financial state of key power utilities. In other words, a lack of creditworthiness. Often, their lack of financial creditworthiness is the most critical obstacle to implementing investment programs. This makes utilities even more dependent on continuous government subsidies.
Welcome to the “10 Candid Career Questions” series, introducing you to the infrastructure and PPP professionals who do the deals, analyze the data, and strategize on the next big thing. Each of them followed a different path into infra and/or PPP practice, and this series offers an inside look at their backgrounds, motivations, and choices. Each blogger receives the same 15 questions and answers 10 or more that tell their career story candidly and without jargon. We believe you’ll be as surprised and inspired as we were.
Photo: Free-Photos / Pixabay Creative Commons
In order for investors to see the potential in developing long-term attractive infrastructure assets, projects must be well prepared. The lack of such primed projects is a major obstacle for ramping up global infrastructure, particularly in developing and emerging economies.
This is one of the priorities for the G20, as Argentinean President Mauricio Macri emphasized in December 2017: "Infrastructure for development" will be one of the key issues of focus during the country's G20 Presidency and it will "…seek to develop infrastructure as an asset class by improving project preparation."
Photo: Dylan's World / Flickr Creative Commons
A decade before the financial crisis, Australia was a bastion of infrastructure successes. The country’s four major airports (Melbourne, Perth, Brisbane and Sydney) were privatized. Numerous greenfield projects were also launched, for example, extensive highway construction, and new projects were continually added to the pipeline.
Some of these new projects, however, faced significant difficulties: some were constructed without robust performance data, leading to overambitious forecasting and overaggressive financial structures. In part, this led Australia to suffer multiple high-profile defaults and brought the country’s infrastructure project pipeline to a halt.
But, The state’s economic growth has reached 3.5%, outstripping the country’s average rate of 2.8%, and even the G20 average (which stands at 3%). As such, NSW’s infrastructure model has likely had a multiplier effect on economic activity—and has been identified as a potential playbook for other jurisdictions.
Promouvoir l’initiative et l’innovation du secteur privé tout en assurant une mise en concurrence : c’est le dilemme que doivent résoudre les pouvoirs publics qui souhaitent encadrer les offres spontanées dans l’infrastructure. Dans un précédent billet, nous avons souligné qu’il fallait considérer avec prudence les offres non sollicitées, à savoir comme une procédure exceptionnelle pour la passation des marchés publics.
Un pays qui accepte la possibilité d’offres non sollicitées et qui adopte des mesures pour les traiter s’attend à être saisi de ce type de projet par les entreprises. En même temps, il doit s’assurer du juste prix et de la rentabilité du projet proposé. Mais Comment une administration publique peut-elle encourager les offres spontanées, tout en attirant suffisamment de candidatures concurrentes?
Photo: kupicoo/ iStock
Un desafío clave a la hora de elaborar una política sobre gestión de “IPs” – iniciativas privadas (también llamadas propuestas no solicitadas o “unsolicited proposals” en inglés) en proyectos de infraestructura es lograr un equilibrio entre el hecho de generar interés de empresas privadas para someter IPs y el de crear un entorno que permita generar una tensión competitiva atrayendo a más postores. En un blog anterior, advertimos que las IPs deben utilizarse con cautela como una excepción a la regla general según la cual los proyectos de infraestructura deberían ser iniciativas del sector público, y sostuvimos que contar con una política adecuada para la gestión de las IPs puede ayudar a garantizar la transparencia y la previsibilidad, y a proteger el interés público.
Ciertamente, un Gobierno que decida considerar IPs y elabore una política para su gestión esperará recibir propuestas que cumplan los requisitos establecidos. Al mismo tiempo, el Gobierno debe asegurarse de que el proyecto represente un precio justo de mercado y optimice los recursos públicos. Pero, ¿qué incentivo tiene el sector privado para presentar una iniciativa privada si el Gobierno la toma y somete a un proceso de adquisición competitiva? ¿Qué puede hacer un Gobierno para que las IPs despierten el interés del sector privado y, al mismo tiempo, atraigan suficientes oferentes?
Photo: BrilliantEye | iStock
As the only global facility specifically dedicated to reinforcing the legal, institutional and policy underpinnings of private sector participation in infrastructure—which we call the critical upstream—we at the Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPIAF) realize we have a key responsibility to developing countries.
That responsibility is to help client governments unlock their potential by de-risking investments and creating an enabling environment for private sector participation, itself a condition to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals and climate-smart objectives. As such, PPIAF fits neatly into the new Maximizing Financing for Development (MFD) approach to crowd in the private sector, an initiative launched by the World Bank Group and other multilateral development banks last year.